Facts speak louder than statistics

Monday, 30 November 2015

If someone claims
that people are being racist against other people for being Muslims you know you can’t take that person seriously.

Individual Muslims can
experience racism but that would be based on that individual Muslims race. Muslims
themselves come from different racial groups and Muslims can experience racism
from other Muslims. For example a white person from Ireland who happens to be a
Muslim could be racist to a black person from Nigeria who happens to be a Muslim
who in turn could be racist against a Malaysian who happens to be a Muslim.

So if Muslims can be
racist towards each other how can anyone be racist towards Muslims as a whole?

The answer of course
is they can’t and that’s because there is no such race as Muslim. You’ll
usually find that the people who are crying racism are those who don’t want to
discuss the current issues regarding Muslims.

Wednesday, 25 November 2015

Don’t bother coming to our country and complaining about our
traditions such as Christmas because our ways are what make our country the great place that it
is. While some whine about the religious side of Christmas the fact is
Christmas has evolved beyond being a Christian
holiday and has something for everyone. On the religious side though, Christmas preaches peace and goodwill to
all which of course doesn’t stand well with a certain cult that is out to
enslave everyone.

Christmas predates the multicultural nonsense that has been
inflicted on us, it is a fine tradition held dearly by this nation for many years
and there is just no real reason to change it.

In any case the proponents of multiculturalism claim that having
many cultures in one country is supposed to add to said country and make it
better and diverse. If we are supposed to be adding to the country then how can
they realistically justify trying to take away one of the country’s oldest and greatest
traditions?

Saturday, 31 October 2015

The left are keen to call people names, let’s throw one back at them and one that accurately describes what they really are.The best response to their nonsensical cries of racism is to call them traitors.

Monday, 26 October 2015

In 2013 the Coalition went to an election promising that the
carbon tax would be abolished. That
carbon tax was introduced by Labor based on a leftist scare campaign over many years
regarding their line that carbon was driving climate change, which is what they
formerly called global warming until it was found the Earth wasn’t actually
warming.

The Coalition won government and abolished the carbon tax
with voters recognising that the CO2 line in climate change was nothing but a
scam. It’s not a real threat to Australia or the world and the carbon tax was a
pointless burden on society and business.

This was a mandate upon which the Coalition Government was
elected, the people of Australia saw through the carbon based "climate
change" and did not want taxpayers' money to be wasted on a theory that
had been exposed as nothing but a United Nations lie to aid in its global power
play.

Malcolm Turnbull in acting on behalf of the UN and others and
with their assistance along with a biased media has since staged a coup and removed
the man elected to lead Australia. Unlike the Rudd/Gillard leadership changes
which saw no real change in Labor policy the Turnbull coup is taking the
country down a path that is against the wishes of the Australian voters. We
voted for a conservative government and now have a socialist leaning government
without an election.

With this in mind any signing of the United Nations global
agreement on climate change by Malcolm Turnbull and government should be
considered invalid based on the lack of mandate from the Australian people. The
Turnbull government does not have the right to sign any anti-carbon climate
agreement especially as Turnbull is literally a stooge put in power by the people
who stand to profit from carbon taxes and trading.

Only the people of Australia can give the government such a
right. If wishing to proceed the government should go again to the Australian
people to request that right or seek a referendum prior to the UN demanding
agreement.

Of course we know they won’t. Representing the Australian
people is the last thing on Malcolm Turnbull’s mind. His goal is to enslave
Australia and find himself in a lucrative job courtesy of those who benefitted
from his betrayal of Australia.

Wednesday, 12 August 2015

The Labor faithful are bleating that the Liberal Party has
blocked gay marriage and are calling the Liberals some nasty names in the
process. Labor will save the day they say, vote Labor and they will deal with
the most important issue we apparently have ever faced. While they gnash their
teeth over this they deliberately ignore the fact the ALP had six years to pass
legislation in favour of gay marriage but deliberately chose not to do so.

Labor’s Penny Wong who is suggesting she is less than
impressed with the Coalition supported Labor’s anti-gay marriage stance while they
were in government. While it’s correct to point out that Labor are hypocrites
in this area there is a reason behind the two faced Labor stance.

While Labor likes to pretend they are the champion of
supposedly suppressed people they also court votes from a group whose religion
says gay people should be killed without question.

This could put Labor in a conundrum but they have the ready-made
solution they know many of their supporters will accept without question. Their
solution? Stall, stall, stall then blame Abbott for blocking gay marriage,
blame conservatives and blame anyone they can.

They can then pretend they
support gay marriage, avoid offending a large portion of their voting base and
wait for the next election where they’ll blame the Liberal Party for every
problem they can while deliberately ignoring their own role in creating those
problems.

Labor are all smoke and mirrors but that’s what works for
them so don’t expect a change in that approach anytime soon.

Sunday, 5 July 2015

This isn't an opinion on gay marriage, it's an observation. Some are saying
that allowing gay marriage is the start of the proverbial slippery slope where
other things such as multiple partners or marrying pets will be accepted. Then
the things we have to accept will get more and more bizarre and in turn cause
bulk harm to our societies.

If people
are concerned then maybe it’s time they became more active in their
communities, more active politically and more vigilant instead of going with
the standard response which is actually quite useless and has never achieved anything
realistic whatsoever.

And what is
the standard response when politicians and other known figures do something
that appears to be bad? It is to call them fools and pretend that’s achieved something
and then do nothing else.

Fools or not
these people are doing things many do not like and they are all getting away
with it since calling them fools doesn’t actually stop them. They
don’t care what you think of them, only that they can keep doing what they want
without any real opposition. Calling someone a fool is really just a
meaningless act.

And now let’s
look at how the U.S. Supreme Court gay marriage ruling affects Australia. Quite
simply It doesn’t, it affects the U.S. It may be something our own courts can
refer to but outside of that it means nothing.

For those who support gay marriage here, a suggestion that this country is
out of step with the rest of the world is not a reason to adopt it here. The
only reason something like that should be allowed is if it’s the right thing
for this country and something like that is not decided for us by another country
otherwise we’ll find ourselves obliged to adopt everything else from that
country and the gay marriage advocates might not like some of the things we end
up with.

In other
words make the case for Australia. What other countries are doing, what year it
is or cries of homophobia are not justifications for it. If you can’t put
forward a case that doesn’t rely on mentioning those things then you don’t have
a case.

Sunday, 31 May 2015

The initial tone of
this article was supposed to be a line of sarcasm aimed at the feel-good
factions in the West who played a large part in Africa’s slide into chaos but
in researching the various events I get the impression the people who called for
the West’s uncontrolled withdrawal from Africa really believe they have done
the right thing.

Africa, the story so far.

Some black people want white colonialism out of Africa. After all, the black people
were being held down and the white people were racist and the source of all
their woes.

There are a group of white people who agree with them and chant a lot of slogans. The real issues don't seem to be addressed but some people get a jolly little feel-good moment out of it all

It’s only fair, give them back their countries, they deserve
to make their own way and they will do it without white people around. A
British politician not caring for how things will affect people on the
continent talks of a ‘wind of change’ in Africa. It’s a speech that sounds
noble to the naïve ears around the world but to the people with a clue it
really tells of betrayal and changing large parts of Africa from safe and
stable to places of absolute despair.

One by one the former colonies become independent. Most
descend into chaos immediately. With a starry eyed disregard for what’s really
happening Britain’s Harold Wilson brags that Britain has granted independence
to more people than any other nation in history. Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith responds
by pointing out in one instance it resulted in a million people being killed in
3 days.

Most of Africa is now under black rule, this is also known
as majority rule and somehow it is something special. However the anti-colonialist/feel
good brigade aren’t as happy as they could be. Rhodesia and South Africa are
still governed by white people. These countries weren’t colonies of
exploitation, they have substantial white populations who actually live in that
part of the world and aren’t too keen to give up what they have worked so hard
to build.

The anti-colonialists demand that the white populations hand
over their nations to majority rule and allow the black populations to enjoy
all the benefits that such freedom will bring them just like the rest of
Africa. Having had dealings with many of the people who actually left these
lucky nations and hearing how the wonders of majority rule brought mass rape,
looting and murder amongst other wonders the
Rhodesian’s and South African’s, much to
the surprise of the anti-colonial brigade, firmly decline.

Realising that the British government was more interested in
appeasing the newly independent anti-white dictatorships of Africa and Asia than
doing what’s in the best interests of their country the Rhodesian
government declares its independence from the United Kingdom. It was already
independent in practice so the declaration shouldn’t cause any real issues.

Shocked that the Rhodesians want to prevent their country from
enjoying the benefits of majority rule most nations around the world condemn
Rhodesia and announce sanctions. Rhodesia’s independence does not follow the
general African example of plunging the country into chaos, in fact life goes
on the same. This is not good for the nations black people appears to be the
belief of all those crying foul. They must be right, just because something
worked in the past doesn’t mean you can keep doing it. This is 1965 after all
and somehow the current year is supposed to stop certain things from happening.
Somehow.

Sanctions are enforced against Rhodesia. There appears to be
no real legality in those sanctions but there are plenty of feel good moments
in them for the starry eyed white anti-colonial brigade. There are also communist
backed ‘freedom fighters’ who may be able to save the day for the white feel
good brigade, they have an opportunity to go bring down a stable and safe
nation in the name of freedom. There will be raping, looting and murdering
while they fight for freedom. It’s for the greater good after all.

With those happy thoughts in mind the Bush War starts in
Rhodesia. The freedom fighters go to war against the Rhodesian people to bring
them the previously mentioned benefits of majority rule. The freedom fighters
force tribal villages to provide food and shelter with no concern for the villagers own well-being and safety. The villagers are the first people in Rhodesia to experience
the benefits that majority rule will bring everyone in that country.

The rest of the world praises the freedom fighters that are
fighting bravely against the majority to bring the benefits of majority rule.
Those nasty white Rhodesian’s are led by Ian Smith and although he is a hero of
the Second World War who fought on behalf of Rhodesia and the British
Commonwealth he is now considered a very naughty person for refusing to accept
the wonders of majority rule. He stands for freedom and civilisation and that’s
just silly! Such antiquated notions have no place in the modern world.

That naughty Ian Smith, the leader of an Incredibly Awesome
Nation, is standing in the way of that wonderful
majority rule that most of Africa has. The black people of Rhodesia do not
support the Ian Smith regime bleat the anti-colonial brigade. All black people
would never have a thing to do with him and the ‘whites’ whose army are
illegally fighting against the brave freedom fighters whom all black people
love and admire. For some reason it isn’t mentioned that most of the Rhodesian
Army comprises of black volunteers. Maybe the feel good brigade know
better than the people who actually live in the country and want to ensure
Rhodesia gets the majority rule everyone really wants and but just don’t know
it yet.

Rhodesian Soldiers

Rhodesia comes to a deal for majority rule that is different
to the rest of Africa. It acknowledges that majority rule is inevitable and it
also acknowledges that overall the majority of the black population are not yet
ready to participate in a modern democracy. Given time they will be but this is
not good enough for the feel good brigade and the communist funded freedom
fighters. After all, it’s 1979. Somehow this means the Rhodesians should surrender
since bad things can’t happen anymore.

Rhodesia is renamed Zimbabwe Rhodesia and has fair and free
elections that all citizens can participate in. The communist funded freedom
fighters back away from the idea of fair and free elections for some reason.
The election is won by moderate nationalist Bishop Abel Muzorewa who wants to
take advantage of the strong economy the new country has inherited and bring
peace. He offers amnesty to the communist funded freedom fighters and points
out the country has what they fought for, majority rule. They mostly refuse
though. It appears they have a different definition of majority rule. They
complain about the results of an election they actually boycotted and keep on
fighting.

The West pressures Zimbabwe Rhodesia to give consideration
to the definition of majority rule that the communist funded freedom fighters
subscribe to. For some reason the wishes of those who boycotted fair and free
elections must be given serious consideration over those who made the effort to
run for office and those who made the effort to vote. Maybe the fact that the
country moved to majority rule without the West’s starry eyed feel good guidance
has ruffled the feathers of those who wanted to be able to take credit for
guiding the country into the wonderful world of majority rule in Africa.

Britain takes control of the country and tries to pretend
they were really in control all along by referring to it as the ’British Dependency of Southern Rhodesia’. The country had actually been ruling itself
since 1923 and Britain heavily depended on Rhodesia’s help in several wars
but never mind that, they must be taught a little lesson for daring to think
for themselves and rejecting majority rule based on what they had witnessed it
doing in other countries. If only they had accepted the official perspective
that majority rule is wonderful! You just have to ignore the raping, looting
and murder that always takes place, why couldn’t they do that?

Elections are held and on 18 April 1980 the country becomes
the independent Republic of Zimbabwe. The country once again has majority rule.
They actually had it before Britain took control but no one is supposed to take
any notice of that. The elections are won by the communist funded
freedom fighter Robert Mugabe who promises to fairly rule Zimbabwe and
encourages the white people to stay. He is supported by former Rhodesian Prime
Minister Ian Smith who offers advice to the new government. The future looks
steady for the new country. After all, it’s 1980, what could go wrong?

Everything goes wrong for the country as the Mugabe
government starts attacking white farmers. Mugabe complains that the whites
have made sure they have the best farming land in the country quoting figures
of how small the white population is compared to the amount of productive land
they hold. Many in the West join the cry as well, shame on the whites they say,
give it back to the blacks! Somehow this means nothing is really going wrong.
Not many of the feel good brigade seem to notice that while Mugabe is crusading
against the white farmers he is eliminating his political enemies as well.

Many white farmers lose their farms. Initially the farmers received
payment but later on the farms are just seized without compensation. Farm
production drops and Zimbabwe goes from being the bread basket of southern
Africa to being a basket case. It turns out the white farmers weren’t actually
hogging all the best land in the country but simply had the best worked land.
The white farmer’s modern farming machinery and techniques provided them with
the best yield giving them the most out of what they had.

The life expectancy of the people in Zimbabwe goes from 60
to 34. The economy collapses and people are starving. Zimbabwe follows what the
rest of Africa experienced with majority rule. The people who helped bring down
Rhodesia either praise Mugabe or are looking at white ruled South Africa while extolling
the wonders of majority rule that other African nations have.

Zimbabwean children picking up corn that had spilled from a truck

Many in the West protest against apartheid in South Africa.
They chant many things in solidarity with those living under it. Some come up
with plans that are intended to force South Africa to end apartheid but most
just chant some cutesy slogans then go to their nice homes and have dinner
afterwards.

In a whites only election whites of South
Africa vote to end apartheid and allow majority rule. They should
have done this a long time ago bleat the protestors. They have no real grounds
for concern, everything should be fine. It’s 1994 after all, bad things cannot
happen now. Anyway the world is watching the brave new South Africa take its
baby steps into nationhood, nothing can go wrong with the world watching.

The ruling African National Congress positions itself to
hold power with little opposition, the nation’s constitution allows it a lot of
leverage and the ANC implements affirmative action. Traditionally affirmative
action is a form of state sanctioned racism designed to give certain minorities
an unfair advantage to help fudge certain statistics. In South Africa it gives
the racial majority an unfair advantage and helps bring down many businesses
because they have to hire based on race, not qualifications.

Despite declaring they are against racism the feel good brigade
who claim they ended apartheid are silent when the white people of South Africa
experience racism. The racism experienced makes apartheid look tame by comparison
but not a peep is heard from those who claim to have freed South Africa.

White farmers in South Africa are targeted and over 3,000 are murdered. The ANC shows its concern by chanting slogans in support of the murders. In general 50 murders are committed
every day in South Africa and 500,000 women are raped every year. The
numbers of child and baby rape are amongst the highest in
the world. Maybe the feel good brigade think South Africa is simply overindulging on the
benefits of majority rule.

The majority of Africans live in abject poverty, with starvation, crime and AIDS running rampant. Again, not a peep
is heard by the people of the West who freed Africa from ‘the whites’. Perhaps
they are busy rejoicing on their so called successes and looking for new low
effort causes to champion.

While all this is happening many black people leave the
chaos in Africa and move to the countries run by white people. Many do well for
themselves but there is a large group within those countries who claim they are
being held down and that white people are racist and are the source of all
their woes. There are a group of white people who agree with them and chant a
lot of slogans. The real issues don't seem to be addressed but some people get a jolly
little feel-good moment out of it all………..

Saturday, 7 February 2015

One thing Labor supporters like to do in defence of the
Rudd/Gillard era of economic vandalism and the high borrowing ways of Labor in
general is to pretend that the Howard era was actually a debacle that was of no benefit to Australia. They’ll bleat that the only way the Howard government
paid down debt was by asset sales and follow this with claims Howard had left the
country economically in bad shape.

Somehow this perspective justifies Rudd/Gillard taking
Australia from a negative debt position to over $350 billion worth of debt within
six years. Howard paid down debt by asset sales after all, Labor could have
done that, anybody can do that so runs their logic. This of course ignores that
it was the Hawke/Keating Labor government that got the asset sales ball rolling.
$3 billion worth of assets were sold outright and $3.4 billion in shares were sold
only the money obtained by Labors asset sales didn’t actually pay down debt.

So without the spin let’s take a look at the situation and
the numbers, in 1996 the Howard government inherited the $96 billion debt from the
previous Fraser and Hawke/Keating governments. To pay down this debt
the Liberals continued with the Labor policy of selling assets. $11 billion
worth of assets were sold outright and $53 billion in shares were floated for a
total of $64 billion that was used to pay down the debt.

$96 billion minus $64 billion leaves $32 billion, this
remaining amount was also paid down and not by the proceeds of asset sales. Not
only was the debt paid but there were regular budget surpluses and by the end
of the Howard government the Future Fund was in place holding $50 billion and
there was $20 billion in the bank that was providing the budget with $1 billion
in interest per year. If this was all solely down to the asset sales without
any real economic skill then the Howard government certainly knew how to
stretch a dollar.

During the nine years of the Howard government Australia functioned
as a welfare state, was running continued budget surpluses, unemployment was
low, the cost of living was at reasonable levels and the debt was gone.

Under the subsequent Rudd/Gillard government the surpluses
were gone, the money in the bank was gone, the debt was back bigger than ever
and accompanied by corresponding cuts to services and welfare to help fund the
interest repayments. Job losses were high, business closures were high and the
cost of living was exceptionally high yet it was actually Howard who left the country
in bad shape?

Sunday, 1 February 2015

.There is a belief out there
that the ALP have learned their lesson from their 2012 defeat and they are all
penitent and wouldn’t dare do the same things again. The fact they presented
themselves as the saviour of Queensland and the LNP as the people wrecking
Queensland just shows us the deception continues with the ALP.They were presenting the
proposed asset leases by the LNP as asset sales and as the worst thing anyone
could do and behaving as if their own hands are clean on the issue. After deliberately
going into the 2009 election concealing their true plans they started selling or
leasing assets as well as cutting services. The actions taken by the ALP
massively pushed up the cost of living in Queensland.The reason the ALP sales and cuts is because they had taken Queensland’s debt from $15
billion to $89 billion in the space of a year and needed funds to pay the
interest on the debt. The debt didn’t decrease though as they kept on
borrowing.This election result and
getting themselves voted back in at all has been an amazing feat by the ALP, they
created the problems Queensland has, they cast the people trying to fix the
problems in a bad light and then the ALP presented themselves as the people to
fix everything.And the LNP got voted out
for doing the job they were voted in to do.

Well, I have to
congratulate Labor/Union Party on what looks like being a win and certainly a
loss for Campbell Newman. The swing must be massive, but did Labor gain this
swing, or are the people of Queensland completely unaware of what they have
done? Yes, I believe that is what has happened.

Firstly, until the people of this once fine country, wake up to
the fact it is impossible for a government to set and execute an agenda within 3 short years, particularly if left a
fiscal mess as the LNP was, we will continue along the path we are going, which
is self-destruction.

Secondly, until our two major parties
have massive shake-ups we will continue to have the only option of electing
people that do not have the capability to run a multi-billion dollar
"organisation". Many of our "representatives" are there
because they can't get a job elsewhere or because of the need for greed and/or
power. These are not the types we want or need.

Thirdly, until the younger
generations of Australians cease with the "gimme gimme gimme"
attitude (and a few older generations), our country will forever be the mess it
is now.

On that note, from here on
in, I shall join many in this group and become part of their "gimme gimme
gimme" society. No longer will I sit back paying taxes and getting nothing
for them. For every tax increase imposed or, in the case of a Labor government
every deficit increase, I shall demand more and more and more.

YEP, if you can't beat 'em,
join 'em running this country into the ground.

Tuesday, 20 January 2015

.Crime would appear to be a necessity to the economy.Basically Australia has a post industrial service economy which was underwritten by a mining boom.Because one major economic performance measure looks more towards sales and services made by companies and not by the manufacturing of goods it’s pretty much the more sales the better.Where crime fits in to the picture is really quite simple, a criminal breaks into your home and for example steals your DVD player and other sundries, there are then several expenses you face.First of all you hopefully have insurance, your insurance company has been receiving money from you and the money you have been paying has been contributing to the insurance company’s bottom line.Then you need to get the break in damage repaired. Usually someone needs to be employed for this task. That person will be doing a job and earning money that they otherwise would not be earning.

Then you need to buy a new DVD player and other items, retailers make sales that they would not otherwise be making if a crime had not been committed.If you are assaulted maybe you will need medical treatment, medication will be prescribed, money for the chemist and if your clothes are damaged they will need to be replaced which means more money for a clothes retailer.Maybe the experience has traumatised you so you seek help from an appropriate health professional, another patient for them and more money for their practice or maybe you just start drinking heavily which is more sales for a bottle shop.Money is spent that otherwise wouldn’t have been spent. Because of crime more money is spent and in the process it’s helping keep people employed, helping keep businesses running and helping the economy so if a crime is committed against you don’t feel bad because it’s actually for the greater good since crime is helping this nation to have a strong economy..

Sunday, 11 January 2015

You'll see them in some Internet
discussion rooms, the people who want the argument to be permanently slanted in
their favour and then cry when things don’t go how they want. They then post
that they are leaving the room because they wanted somewhere people can speak
freely then run off to one where everyone agrees without question. Those rooms aren't always a bed of
roses for them though:

Warmist 1: I feel so smug, I’m glad we have
this room where we can talk about climate change and present our data. We are
all free thinking here and capable of reasoned debate. I am so glad we are all
individuals.

Warmist 2: Yes, we are all individuals.

Warmist 1: Thankfully we don’t have those climate realists.

Warmist 2: Yes, no realists here.

Warmist 1: The world is obviously getting warmer, there’s a consensus but
they keep saying things that are best ignored such as there’s been no warming
in 18 years.

Warmist 2: Yes, no warming in 18 years.

Warmist 1: Are you going against the consensus? IF YOU WANT TO MAKE TROUBLE WE
DON’T WANT YOU HERE. Admin! We have a trouble maker on this page! I demand that
you remove them immediately! They are attacking people here! Get rid of that @#$%
before I do them some serious harm!

About This Page

Welcome to World Central, an independent page presenting straightforward news, views and attitudes. Looking for what's right as opposed to just looking right and presenting the facts, not the fantasy and certainly not the ideology. This page is not designed to offend, the intent is to find the facts and present them to the world.The opinions expressed here are the editor’s and do not represent any other persons, company, organisation etc. The opinions posted in the comments section are the opinion of the person posting them.